Letters to the Editor

Trump, trumpery, third party, death penalty

A letter writer suggests that Donald Trump run for town council to learn the ropes before running for higher office.
A letter writer suggests that Donald Trump run for town council to learn the ropes before running for higher office. The Associated Press

Trump should run for town council

Re “The choice between Trump and Clinton so far” (Editorials, July 31): Heard of this Trump fella? Seems he’s itching to get into public service, and I certainly commend him for that. Hip, hip, hooray.

However, as in most fields, it’s important to learn the ropes before you advance to the next level. You wouldn’t want your heart surgeon to jump straight from first year pre-med to the operating room ... you’d want to know that he’d gotten his feet wet long before he cracked your chest open, right?

So, I suggest that we steer this fella toward an appropriate job, something that suits his skill level and temperament. Maybe a seat on some town council? If he proves to be a responsible civil servant and an effective leader, perhaps he should run for mayor. Who knows where this kind of experience might lead him?

Seems prudent, right? So, let’s wish him luck.

And extend our condolences to that poor town.

Gary Nyland, Carmichael

The problem with progressives

Re “Messages of exclusion and hate should offend us all” (Forum, July 31): Notice the intellectual and theological dishonesty William Endicott uses by talking about Donald Trump and Roger Jimenez in the same breath, as if they are morally equivalent.

Endicott can’t understand evangelicals voting for Trump. Two reasons: 1. Trump may have terrible flaws, but he is merely a political candidate. Evangelicals have their savior, Jesus, in which to put their faith. And at least our candidate doesn’t label our belief in God’s word as “bigotry.” 2. Endicott and Hillary Clinton are under the ironic descriptor of “progressive.” Progressives have no problem at all picking the parts of God’s word they agree with and ignoring or rationalizing the parts that are not “evolved” enough for their liking.

Dean R. Coupe, Roseville

The meaning of Trump’s ‘trumpery’

Re “Trump’s trumpery shows its worth” (Letters, July 31): Frank Horowitz used the word “trumpery” while writing about Donald Trump. I was inquisitive about this word.

It is an old French word, trumperie, that by the Middle Ages had evolved into “trumpery” in English.

Its meaning is “practices or beliefs that are superficially or visually appealing but have little real value or worth.” In Middle English it was commonly used to mean trickery or to deceive. By about 1840 it had reached its peak in the English language and has since become archaic.

Thinking about this, it would be prudent to resurrect it as the definition of the word trumpery explains the behavior shown by Donald Trump in this election cycle.

David Sinclair,

El Dorado Hills

Time for third party is now

Re “Libertarian gives conservatives way to oppose Trump” (Forum, July 31): The Sacramento Bee should rewrite this headline to say “Gives everyone a way …”

Now that the dust has settled on the conventions and sensing disappointment on both sides, I read this and came up with an idea. After some research into this third party, we all will not agree with their entire platform, but I think there is enough there to make the Libertarian Party another alternative for not only those of us who can’t find our your way to vote for either Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

With some support from the media, I think Gary Johnson could be who we are looking for. So come on and let’s quit complaining and do something.

Billy Barnes, Carmichael

Death penalty can be reformed

Re “California’s broken death penalty system can be fixed” (Forum, Another View, July 24): I agree that the death penalty as it stands has flaws, but these flaws can be fixed.

California needs a working death penalty, and Proposition 66 has the ability to do just that. To state, as Ron Briggs does, that victim’s families will not benefit by repealing the death penalty is wrong. A repeal of the death penalty and changing existing death row sentences to life in prison without the possibility of parole will not spare survivors further wounds.

My hope is that none of us will know the pain of losing a loved one to a murderer, torturer or serial killer. However, for those who have faced the horror, or may face it in the future, justice in the form of a reformed death penalty should be an option for those grieving families.

I’m voting No on Proposition 62 and Yes on Proposition 66.

Michael Rushford,

Carmichael

Prop. 66 will speed up death penalty

Some say the death penalty is not a deterrent to stopping heinous crimes from happening. In California, this may be true as the worst of the worst criminals know they won’t ever be executed or that they’ll end up sitting on death row for 30 years or more.

I feel that line of thinking would change if they knew they could no longer be able to use endless appeals. Proposition 66 is the answer Californians are looking for regarding the death penalty. Proposition 66 will streamline the system by expediting the appeals process by limiting these criminals’ ability to file appeals. Reforms through Proposition 66 will speed up the death penalty process while ensuring that no innocent person is ever executed.

Barbara Price, Sacramento

EXTRA LETTERS ONLINE

Find them at:

sacbee.com/letters-to-the-editor

HOW TO SUBMIT

Online form (preferred):

www.sacbee.com/submit-letter

Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779,

Sacramento, CA 95852

150-word limit. Include name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, brevity and content.

  Comments